The birth of Prince James Francis Edward Stuart (later known as the Chevalier de St George or the Pretender/Old Pretender) on the 10th June 1688, was shrouded with controversy. Queen Mary of Modena, the wife of King James II of England and Ireland (VII of Scotland), had not given birth to a child since 1683 and her previous five children had not survived past infancy. Whether the child was hers or not was a hot topic of conversation. But what is without doubt, is that for the royal couple Prince James Francis Edward Stuart was a much-desired infant.
Rather than being wet nursed, the young James was fed on a diet of water gruel mix comprising barley flour, water, perhaps mixed with sugar and currants – no milk at all. Queen Mary had been persuaded that such a method of feeding would be advantageous to her son’s health. Given the deaths of so many of her previous offspring and her older age for carrying a child (she was 29 years) it is perhaps unsurprising that she would do anything to protect the health of her baby son, the heir to the throne (Gregg, 2023). We might also conjecture that the male physicians around her were considered highly knowledgeable on the topic, and undoubtedly, money would have been no object in ensuring the royal baby received the very best of care.
Of course, it was a disastrous decision. The health of the infant soon deteriorated, and he was not expected to live. Royal physicians obstinately held on to their advice and all manner of remedies that might be found in the jars of apothecaries were tried. But the one clear necessity he needed – milk – was off the menu. Suckling, the doctors persistently argued, would hasten his death. Queen Mary was said to visit her desperately ill baby every day in Richmond – where he had been removed - and was seen to weep constantly. Reports differ as to whether it was the King or Queen who, disgusted with the failings of the physicians, ordered that a wet nurse was sent for. Soon after, a Mrs. Cooper, wife of a tile maker, began wet nursing the young prince. On a diet of human breastmilk Prince James immediately began to thrive. Such was the delight of his royal parents, they settled on his wet nurse the staggering sum of two or three hundred guineas as well as an income of £100 an annum. It is said she did not know how to cope with such wealth (Haile, 1905).
Given that rumours were circulating about the legitimacy of this child-to-be, not least the possibility that an infant had been smuggled in via a warming pan, King James II was keen to dispel the gossipmongering. 70 people witnessed the birth, and their testimony was published by the King to affirm the child was indeed born of Queen Mary and was thus the legitimate heir to the throne. The miraculous turnaround in the health of the infant James, once fed on a diet of breastmilk, did little to dispel the talk that he was – in fact – an interloper (Gregg, 2023). What this story tells us is that decisions about infant feeding, however well-intentioned, can have catastrophic consequences.
References
Gregg, Edward, 'James Francis Edward [James Francis Edward Stuart; styled James; known as Chevalier de St George, the Pretender, the Old Pretender (1688-1766)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (retrieved 20.3.23).
Martin Haile, Mary of Modena, Her Life and Letters, (London: JM Dent and Co, 1905), pp 195-6.
Image credit
French School early 18th century, Portrait of Prince James Francis Edward Stuart (1688-1766), The Old Pretender, circa 1695. From https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Portrait_of_Prince_James_Francis_Edward_Stuart_(French_School).jpg
Add comment
Comments